The Children Overboard issue develops

[Anonymous]

Any links to comments from sailors who actually went out to the "stricken" boat?

The Miranda Devine article provides that, quoting sailors which saw attempted sabotage on the boat in question before it 'mysteriously' sank.

The lefties won't accept that as a credible source though, because it's devastating for their argument...

The Miranda Devine article was a column which quoted the view of a Liberal politician, who's quotes should be treated with caution. Even Miranda said that.

It is ambiguous and designed to appeal to the lowest elements of pub talk.

It can be countered by other opinion pieces and is ultimately blown out of the water by the official CDF report.

 

[^ Pando]

Big difference between a combat situation and a combat job, Willow. I put it to you that the Navy doesn't have any female gunners. Prove me wrong and I'll gladly concede.

I'm saying that I'm unaware of women in dedicated combat roles.
The Navy may have changed, but as far as I know there is no such thing as a female Navy gunner.

Women have served at sea in the RAN since 1981. In 1990 their role expanded to include service in ships assigned for combat related duty.
http://www.navy.gov.au/general/womensubs.htm

This is why I was unsure about the Navy. Ships are a bit different to the other defence forces:

Current government policy allows women to be employed in all areas of Defence other than those that might involve hand to hand combat. In the Navy, this policy only bars women from the Clearance Diver Branch. That means women can serve in all types of ships and submarines which have suitable accommodation. In the case of war, women will serve alongside their male colleagues onboard submarines.

Even this is an odd thing. How does clearance diving = hand to hand combat? :|

Want to have a guess how many Australian submarines have "suitable accomodation"? :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Answer the question Pando, do you think the Laurel Whittle story is a fabrication?

 

[Anonymous]

Fast edit Pando... but not fast enough.

 

[^ Pando]

Fast edit Pando... but not fast enough.

:lol:

 

[^ Pando]

Answer the question Pando, do you think the Laurel Whittle story is a fabrication?

Hell yes. A fabrication of the worst order.

 

[Anonymous]

Anyway, Naval Gunner Laurel Whittle's story was published by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation - the ABC refer to her as Australian Navy gunner aboard HMAS Adelaide.

I would think that's enough and your requests for further proof are just delaying the inevitable.

You said you would concede. We now wait to see if you're up to it.

 

[^ Pando]

Had a little think about your Navy recruiting website, and have concluded that it's full of shit. I should have left my edited post as it was.

Women aren't allowed in dedicated field force jobs in the Australian military.

 

[Jimbo]

The Miranda Devine article was a column which quoted the view of a Liberal politician, who's quotes should be treated with caution. Even Miranda said that.

Not quite.

Brandis's information should be treated with caution, as it is based on reports given to the inquiry of what navy personnel thought they saw in the heat of the moment. But it does reveal a "pattern of conduct" by boat people and people smugglers which includes sabotage of their boats.

Devine is quoting from an official report from a Government Senator. She only advises conservatism because the information comes from personnel who were obviously shocked by what they saw.

It is ambiguous and designed to appeal to the lowest elements of pub talk.

As I said, it's an official report from a Government Senator. Hardly 'pub talk' :lol:

Or can we just assume the Senator is a liar too, because he's a Liberal?

It can be countered by other opinion pieces

Such as?

and is ultimately blown out of the water by the official CDF report.

Hardly. If anything the CDF report is the one which is ambiguous.

 

[^ Pando]

Anyway, Naval Gunner Laurel Whittle's story was published by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation - the ABC refer to her as Australian Navy gunner aboard HMAS Adelaide.

I would think that's enough and your requests for further proof are just delaying the inevitable.

You said you would concede. We now wait to see if you're up to it.

Yeah, I'll concede because the ABC says so... :roll:

 

[Anonymous]

Had a little think about your Navy recruiting website, and have concluded that it's full of sh*t. I should have left my edited post as it was.

Women aren't allowed in dedicated field force jobs in the Australian military.

Let's forget the rank for a moment.
Are saying that Laura Whittle wasn't on the Adeliade at all?
If so, what do you base this on?

 

[^ Pando]

Willow.
Stuffs me why I fell for it, but you had to find a recruiting site for women who may want to be submariners.

It says that women are allowed in any role except "hand to hand combat" which is obviously not true.

Unless we have a Defence force of ninjas, women are allowed to do anything.

Find me one female member of Artillery, find me one female fighter pilot.

We can go from there. I've got heaps. 8)

Do we have any submarines with "suitable accomodation"?

 

[Anonymous]

and is ultimately blown out of the water by the official CDF report.

Hardly. If anything the CDF report is the one which is ambiguous.

Mate, listen to yourself... you're putting a newspaper opinion piece ahead of the department of defence.
And you thought I was the lefty. :lol:

 

[Jimbo]

and is ultimately blown out of the water by the official CDF report.

Hardly. If anything the CDF report is the one which is ambiguous.

Mate, listen to yourself... you're putting a newspaper opinion piece ahead of the department of defence.
And you thought I was the lefty. :lol:

No. I'm comparing a Government Senator's report based on eyewitness accounts from sailors who were at the scene to the DoD report.

Nothing to say about my other comments? That's what shows you as the lefty :lol:

 

[^ Pando]

Mate, listen to yourself... you're putting a newspaper opinion piece ahead of the department of defence.
And you thought I was the lefty. :lol:

So you've given up on quoting the ABC? :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Mate, listen to yourself... you're putting a newspaper opinion piece ahead of the department of defence.
And you thought I was the lefty. :lol:

So you've given up on quoting the ABC? :lol:

Laura Whittle, a sailor who appeared in photos of the incident, said the only child she had seen held over the side of the Olong was being helped by the father: "The man was wanting to get the child into our inflatable boat to safety."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/story/0,12070,1286158,00.html

 

[Jimbo]

Well?

 

[Anonymous]

and is ultimately blown out of the water by the official CDF report.

Hardly. If anything the CDF report is the one which is ambiguous.

Mate, listen to yourself... you're putting a newspaper opinion piece ahead of the department of defence.
And you thought I was the lefty. :lol:

No. I'm comparing a Government Senator's report based on eyewitness accounts from sailors who were at the scene to the DoD report.

Nothing to say about my other comments? That's what shows you as the lefty :lol:

It was tough job on a number of of levels for the sailors but they got the job done.
Are you doubting Laura Whittle's account... and why?

 

[Anonymous]

Well?

Are you only person on the forums tonight?

You'd think that after all this time you'd understand forum discussion.

 

[mickdo]

Are you doubting Laura Whittle's account... and why?

Because it doesn't fit their argument :lol: :lol: :lol: